rumor: Pentax 645D Price: $6500 USD

[BJL]

Live view directly on the LCD of the camera is not technically possible with CCD's.

To be more precise: Live View at more than about 1fps is not possible with Full Frame type of CCDs uses in all DMF so far, neither on the rear LCD nor on a computer with tethering. Live View at vaguely video-like frame rates and so adequate to follow any significant subject motion requires either active pixel sensors (so-called CMOS; see note) or interline CCD (as in most videocams and digicams). The former is a far better bet for future MF sensors.

Note on jargon. Many if not all CCD's are manufactured using CMOS process, so the naming CCD vs CMOS is strange.
The distinctive feature of so-called CMOS sensors is the active pixel approach, with its on-sensor charge amplification.

[Hywel]

Which is more important, creativity in images or a new camera?

Absolutely... creativity. Sometimes a new camera can help get it back when you are a bit burned out, but much more often it is just an excuse not to get off your arse and take photos. I really enjoyed the switch from Canon to Hasselblad, mostly because it forced me to slow down and take a bit more care, but also opened up a few new options (flash sync with my big strobes at 1/800th)... and when I get it right, it rewards me with a downright gorgeous silky image.

So now I'm rewarding myself with a few purely personal photo trips to places I've always wanted to go, just for fun (sorry, Mr. Tax Inspector, just as a portfolio development loss-leader project. Ahem. Entirely work-related of course!) Much better than panicking because my H3DII-31 is now outdated and fretting that maybe I should buy a H4D...  

And I've taken to carrying a GF1 in my fleece pocket more or less everywhere, because the best camera is the one you have with you.

But . . . If you really want to improve the look of  your imagery, send a color calibrator to your potential clients, either than or buy an I-Mac and just image everything at that retina burning blue setting they come out of the box with.

Oh yes. My customers are Joe Public on a web browser, and I shudder to think what my lovely photos look like on some of their screens... I've had people complaining that the pictures are "all dark"... try turning the contrast down a bit and the brightness up a bit, willya? If I was global dictator every monitor would have to come with an automatic calibrator robot arm which wouldn't let you look at any pics until the calibration was done!  

  Hywel.

[fredjeang]

Absolutely... creativity. Sometimes a new camera can help get it back when you are a bit burned out, but much more often it is just an excuse not to get off your arse and take photos. I really enjoyed the switch from Canon to Hasselblad, mostly because it forced me to slow down and take a bit more care, but also opened up a few new options (flash sync with my big strobes at 1/800th)... and when I get it right, it rewards me with a downright gorgeous silky image.

So now I'm rewarding myself with a few purely personal photo trips to places I've always wanted to go, just for fun (sorry, Mr. Tax Inspector, just as a portfolio development loss-leader project. Ahem. Entirely work-related of course!) Much better than panicking because my H3DII-31 is now outdated and fretting that maybe I should buy a H4D...  

And I've taken to carrying a GF1 in my fleece pocket more or less everywhere, because the best camera is the one you have with you.



Oh yes. My customers are Joe Public on a web browser, and I shudder to think what my lovely photos look like on some of their screens... I've had people complaining that the pictures are "all dark"... try turning the contrast down a bit and the brightness up a bit, willya? If I was global dictator every monitor would have to come with an automatic calibrator robot arm which wouldn't let you look at any pics until the calibration was done!  

  Hywel.

I would not expect a satin lover to work with less than an H  
Yes, these browsers...it will be urgent they find a standard. It's a real mess.

Fred.

[pschefz]

Maybe, but I keep thinking . . .

Which is more important, creativity in images or a new camera?

The high end cameras to me seem to be locked in the past, with formats that we call medium (which I think is now something like 6 frame sizes)  or ff 35mm and though they can produce a still image of amazing detail, that usually does nothing for creativity.

We are ooohing and ahhing about the new Pentax, I think mostly because of it's 1/2 price  cost and near dslr usability, but in reality even if it was sold on your local street corner today what can you shoot with it that you can't shoot with a used Hasselblad, Contax, with almost any digital back?

It might look 25% different to the photographer but to the paying client or the end viewing consumer what is really that different?

Cameras are made to tell a story, whether it' one frame or 500,000 frames, it's all about the creativity not the pixel depth, the smoothness in graduation, the bigger brighter viewfinder.

I think it's interesting that for the Hurt Locker, that swept the Academy Awards, Katheryn Bigelow's crew chose Aaton 16mm cameras to show multiple perspectives and a Phantom HD 1,000 fps camera for drama in the explosions.

http://blog.abelcine.com/2010/03/08/the-hu...nematic-ground/

Her camera package and film costs were probably less than James Cameron's Latte budget and though even with that I'm sure there is some forum post on some forum that says if she'd only shot it with a 70mm it would have won 3 more Awards.

This is a funny business, cause nobody initially hires you for anything but the image, the creativity, maybe your production values/professionalism.

Actually nearly everyone that works in editorial and commerce could (I didn't say should, I just said could) shoot their portfolio and reel on a panasonic 4/3's camera and if the work is compelling enough to get attention, then on the day your commissioned you can go to any equipment the  budget can afford whether it be a RED, a 65 million pixel digital back or anything you desire and that your client will accept.

http://tinyurl.com/yj2jb87

So when I think finally a medium format camera with a decent lcd for 10 grand I start thinking hmm, 10 grand goes a long way to shooting something interesting, maybe something I haven't shot before . . .  20 to 30 grand personal project, now that's an investment that will pay off.

But . . . If you really want to improve the look of  your imagery, send a color calibrator to your potential clients, either than or buy an I-Mac and just image everything at that retina burning blue setting they come out of the box with.

IMO

BC

funny, i was thinking the same thing...if i could walk down to samy's and buy one, would i? probably not....

but that is a sign how times have changed....3 years ago, i would have bought the latest top of the line canon unseen.....today, i would look at that long and hard.....not because of the money....3 years ago, a new camera meant a real step up in getting the image to look like (let's face it) film....now we can get that so cheap that ANY money spent is more related to "must have features" then to image quality....

so a raw HD canon with great iso 2500 and 30 mpix would be interesting...and knowing that these features would trickle down within months into the 3000 range would maybe make me patient there as well....but there is nothing this pentax would do for me i can't do without it....

the exciting news is that it seems that someone finally listened to what people actually want and at a price that people can actually justify....

i would not call it a game changer because the market it goes into is so small that one can hardly talk about there being any game at all....

but it is interesting how much press outside the photo industry this announcement has already gotten....and that is all about the price....so if anything pentax got themselves a LOT of free press...in a good way....and none of these outlets will write about the camera actually failing miserably.....

either way, it would be interesting to see how phase and hass have to adjust if this thing becomes available and people start flying to tokyo to pick one up.....because it is still cheaper...

what is annoying is how many features we have asked for, which "could not be put in DMF" and "just aren't possible" actually made it into the pentax....i would not want to live without a dust removal system anymore....regardless of camera system...this just makes my life easier and my workflow faster....

and there is no way in HELL i would ever get a camera which only shoots raw files that can only be read by one software....just won't happen...for the same reason....workflow....i might change software but i won't be stuck with one propriatory software....

[vandevanterSH]

To be more precise: Live View at more than about 1fps is not possible with Full Frame type of CCDs uses in all DMF so far, neither on the rear LCD nor on a computer with tethering. Live View at vaguely video-like frame rates and so adequate to follow any significant subject motion requires either active pixel sensors (so-called CMOS; see note) or interline CCD (as in most videocams and digicams). The former is a far better bet for future MF sensors.

Note on jargon. Many if not all CCD's are manufactured using CMOS process, so the naming CCD vs CMOS is strange.
The distinctive feature of so-called CMOS sensors is the active pixel approach, with its on-sensor charge amplification.

Thanks, that was helpful..

"The distinctive feature of so-called CMOS sensors is the active pixel approach, with its on-sensor charge amplification."

Is that the reason for heat dissipation issues with MFDBs?  

Steve

[oscar falero]

The most exciting aspect of this offering is that it raises questions for existing MF camera makers as to what to do in order to remain competitive and DSLRs to feel some heat with pricing.

The Pentax sets the bar in (A) pricing and finally ( a respectable LCD making it a really portable camera, something that previous backs just brought excuses not to mention false advertisements. I've owned both Leaf and Phase and could only feel safe proofing images on the computer or with my Canon as a Polaroid (WTF). The biggest advantage for me was using multiple camera platforms like RZ, AFD or Hassy.

After obvious comparisons with current MF backs, as a pro (not rich dentists, Golman Sachs executives or weekend warriors) should we consider comparing this Pentax against upcoing DSLRs?

Eventhought I'm a Medium Format and LF shooter at heart...The question I ask myself is..what can this Pentax offer that the upcoming Canon 1Ds or Nikon Dxx can't?

This is my checklist:

MPx-Many of you here have mentioned that 22mp is almost good enough. New Canon/Nikon models will probably be at the low 30's in MPx

Video- Wanted or not good option to have going forward.

LV- I can't manual focus without it. Using hoodman loope, soon swithching to the zacuto model is just great . Give me a Flip up LCD and thats my WLF.

Aspect Ratio- Still only mini645 better than 3:2, but who knows could have a decent VF .

Proven system and availability:Will see!

Software: both tethering and raw processors.

The biggest advantage of the Pentax is not having an AA filter and the available soft and milky Pentax glass.

Please! This is not meant to be a debate, just some questions I'm asking myself, as I consinder what my next camera purchase will be.

[Brady]

I find it  amusing to hear photographers talk about ergonomics in such absolute terms.

There is VERY little about ergonomics which is objective.

Even something like a vertical grip is not the universal preference you'd think it is; I've met more than one photographer who preferred to hold the camera up-and-over rather than with a vertical grip even when available. Not my choice by a long shot - but that's the point - ergonomics are almost entirely a subjective preference.

Doug Peterson
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870  |  Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up
RSS Feed: Subscribe
Buy Capture One at 10% off
Personal Work



Doug,

note the use of "I" in my post.  Nowhere did I say it was a fact.  However,  I'd still bet money my opinion is in the majority.    It's not even about a vertical grip.  I just think the camera isn't balanced very well.  My rz is big no doubt but I'd rather hold that for 3 hrs over an h for 10 minutes.

Anyways about the pentax,  I bet it does everything it says and does it well.  It might be a new sensor for them but it's not like they haven't been around the block before when it cones to making cameras.  If these features have been implemented successly in their Dslr models I see no reason why they would fail here.  That camera sure is ugly though.

[pschefz]

i used to shoot the fuji 680 handheld....and the RZ...for hours...no problem....the H with the zoom is just not doable, especially vertical....the balance is so bad.....i agree that ergonomics is not an absolute thing but there are certain aspects to it that are.....the H is not an ergonomically well design camera if you have average human hands and even worse if you have bigger then average human hands.....

[pschefz]

Maybe, but I keep thinking . . .

Which is more important, creativity in images or a new camera?

The high end cameras to me seem to be locked in the past, with formats that we call medium (which I think is now something like 6 frame sizes)  or ff 35mm and though they can produce a still image of amazing detail, that usually does nothing for creativity.

We are ooohing and ahhing about the new Pentax, I think mostly because of it's 1/2 price  cost and near dslr usability, but in reality even if it was sold on your local street corner today what can you shoot with it that you can't shoot with a used Hasselblad, Contax, with almost any digital back?

It might look 25% different to the photographer but to the paying client or the end viewing consumer what is really that different?

Cameras are made to tell a story, whether it' one frame or 500,000 frames, it's all about the creativity not the pixel depth, the smoothness in graduation, the bigger brighter viewfinder.

I think it's interesting that for the Hurt Locker, that swept the Academy Awards, Katheryn Bigelow's crew chose Aaton 16mm cameras to show multiple perspectives and a Phantom HD 1,000 fps camera for drama in the explosions.

http://blog.abelcine.com/2010/03/08/the-hu...nematic-ground/

Her camera package and film costs were probably less than James Cameron's Latte budget and though even with that I'm sure there is some forum post on some forum that says if she'd only shot it with a 70mm it would have won 3 more Awards.

This is a funny business, cause nobody initially hires you for anything but the image, the creativity, maybe your production values/professionalism.

Actually nearly everyone that works in editorial and commerce could (I didn't say should, I just said could) shoot their portfolio and reel on a panasonic 4/3's camera and if the work is compelling enough to get attention, then on the day your commissioned you can go to any equipment the  budget can afford whether it be a RED, a 65 million pixel digital back or anything you desire and that your client will accept.

http://tinyurl.com/yj2jb87

So when I think finally a medium format camera with a decent lcd for 10 grand I start thinking hmm, 10 grand goes a long way to shooting something interesting, maybe something I haven't shot before . . .  20 to 30 grand personal project, now that's an investment that will pay off.

But . . . If you really want to improve the look of  your imagery, send a color calibrator to your potential clients, either than or buy an I-Mac and just image everything at that retina burning blue setting they come out of the box with.

IMO

BC

latest canon rumor: raw, uncompressed HD video is already being tested.....can be activated via firmware! utilizing the HDMI port to shoot to an external device....
considering we are only about to see the 24pfs upgrade in a week or so (finally) i would not hold my breath....but it shows how much potential is still unlocked and wasn't even considered in the first place....but with good hardware in place even a several year old (even digital) camera can be  and stay cutting edge.....

[gwhitf]

considering we are only about to see the 24pfs upgrade in a week or so (finally) i would not hold my breath....but it shows how much potential is still unlocked and wasn't even considered in the first place....but with good hardware in place even a several year old (even digital) camera can be  and stay cutting edge.....

Agreed. This 5DMarkII is the first camera that I've felt like could stay around here for ten years or so. It might not be the main camera for that long, but would be awesome BTS video camera, or location scouting, or casting, or travel, or whatever. They keep pumping it up bigger and bigger with these regular firmware updates. It just keeps getting better, (but you never have to write another check! What a concept!).

What I'd like to see is Autofocus achieved while using LiveView. I'm not an engineer, I have no idea how hard it would be, but if you wanna talk "gamechanger", then that would do it for me.

And every time that we don't hear about the 1Ds4 getting announced, it almost makes me more excited, because they're adding more and more stuff to it every week, I'm betting.

Still, I'd sell every piece of Canon gear I own, tomorrow, if Hasselblad, (or anyone) came out with a small, lightweight, fast, H revision. Big LCD and fast frame rate. There is something about the rendering capability of MediumFormat, optically, that Canon/Nikon will never achieve. That is my own personal feeling. Call it 3D; call it what you will, but when you see it, you know it. Who knows, maybe this Pentax Sea Mammal will deliver the goods, but I'm not going to move to Tokyo in order to find out. But when you scan the Feature List of the Pentax, it just shows that somebody's been listening to customers.

But when there's money on the table, and pressure to deliver, Usability always trumps Optics. At least for me.

[G_Allen]

I agree 100%. I only find magic, art, and personal satisfaction when using my H2/P30+ combo, but that rarely works in a crazed, high-pressure shoot outside of the studio. I'm looking for something that will give me the magic on location, or at least a usable screen.

[BernardLanguillier]

LV- I can't manual focus without it. Using hoodman loope, soon swithching to the zacuto model is just great . Give me a Flip up LCD and thats my WLF.

This is a very relevant question that I would phrase the following way.

Among the 50 best real world images I shot in 2009, I know for a fact that the focus was at the very exact location where I wanted it to be on all of them thanks to live view.

Had I shot these with a 645D or another back, for how many of these images:
- is critial focus really important?
- would it have been possible to achieve critical focus without live view (with or without AF, taking into account the issues with focus shift when re-composing)?

For the yes/no images, what is the actual resolution of a slighty off focused 40MP image?

I know that for my images perfect infinity focus is often critical, and I have rarely managed to reach perfect infinity focus on my D3x with either MF without live view or AF.

That is of course assuming that all the rest is done perfectly with the right tripod, head and technique.

Cheers,
Bernard

[mtomalty]

considering we are only about to see the 24pfs upgrade in a week or so (finally)

Picked up 2 5DMkll's today and they're,now, shipping with the new firmware


Mark

[BJNY]

some YouTube videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llLddJ4_c88

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_quer..._type=&aq=f

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_quer..._type=&aq=f

[vandevanterSH]

Among the 50 best real world images I shot in 2009, I know for a fact that the focus was at the very exact location where I wanted it to be on all of them thanks to live view.
*********
I am just a hobbyist but over the past year or so, critical focus has assumed more importance for me.  It's a bit discouraging to travel, take photos, get home and on the 30" monitor to see that the focus/sharpness was slightly off.  A problem that is exacerbated by advancing age and aging eyes.  Do you use AF for you landscape work or rely on manual focus with live view and zoom + mag?  That has become pretty much my routine with Nikon.   For my old Hasselblad with a low end digital back,  I have given up on the ease of use of a 45 degree prism and gone to 5.5 X mag hood.  Even with that, I essentially "micro-focus bracket", ie do three separate focusing from "scratch" for a shot and then select the best after getting home.  Much ado about minimal improvements, perhaps.

Steve

[SeanBK]

some YouTube videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llLddJ4_c88

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_quer..._type=&aq=f

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_quer..._type=&aq=f

Thanks for posting. I am impressed, also it seems like it may be lighter than other M.F cameras.

[ziocan]

For the yes/no images, what is the actual resolution of a slighty off focused 40MP image?

That is a great question, especially for photographers shooting people, aka fashion or advertising with people.
I answer the question for myself a while ago, since my phase camera and back are sitting in the shelf most of the times and the 24mp dslr get 90% of the work.
Last week I shot one of 12 pages editorial for a fashion magazine, about 1000 captures. My assistant and I did not find one file that was out of focus enough for not being able of using the pic, I would say I had a 95% rate of tack sharp and a 5% of in focus but not sharp. On most of the shots the girl was moving back and forth and jumping too.
Forget to have a nearly 100% sucesful rate with any of the current MF, and that include H and Leica.

So to answer our question, how much is worth a 40mp image slightly OOF? Nothing.

If this Pentax has an AF that is half as good as its DSLR ( I cannot see why not?) it is definitively worth looking at.

[EricWHiss]

That is a great question, especially for photographers shooting people, aka fashion or advertising with people.
I answer the question for myself a while ago, since my phase camera and back are sitting in the shelf most of the times and the 24mp dslr get 90% of the work.
Last week I shot one of 12 pages editorial for Marie Claire, about 1000 captures. My assistant and I did not find one file that was out of focus enough for not being able of using the pic, I would say I had a 95% rate of tack sharp and a 5% of in focus but not sharp. On most of the shots the girl was moving back and forth and jumping too.
Forget to have a nearly 100% sucesful rate with any of the current MF, and that include H and Leica.

So to answer our question, how much is worth a 40mp image slightly OOF? Nothing.

Were you shooting stopped down or wide open?  I haven't found that high a success rate with my 5D2 wide and actually I am doing about the same with the rollei using MF as I am with the 5D2 wide.  I used to do better with my 1Ds.

[ziocan]

Were you shooting stopped down or wide open?  I haven't found that high a success rate with my 5D2 wide and actually I am doing about the same with the rollei using MF as I am with the 5D2 wide.  I used to do better with my 1Ds.

I was in studio on white and shot at f7.1 with an 85mm.
It was not a canon though.

[tho_mas]

I know that for my images perfect infinity focus is often critical, and I have rarely managed to reach perfect infinity focus on my D3x with either MF without live view or AF

IMO distances slightly closer than infinity, i.e. almost but not quite infinity, are by far the most challenging distances to focus, especially with wider lenses.
I'd never rely on AF for these distances. I also don't think that a camera LCD will display critical focus at these distances accurate enough.
And it's impossible to judge correct focus at these distances on the screen (as everything appears to be sharp).
Now, a split image screen will help you to achieve perfect focus at these distances all the time. You really see the slightest offset in the split image even with wide angles.